Psychometric evaluation of the PainCAS Interference with Daily Activities, Psychological/Emotional Distress, and Pain scales.
Psychometric evaluation of the PainCAS Interference with Daily Activities, Psychological/Emotional Distress, and Pain scales.
复制标题
PainCAS 对日常活动、心理/情绪困扰和疼痛量表干扰的心理测量评估。
DOI：
10.1007/s11136-017-1766-3
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Inflexxion,Inc.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McCaffrey,StaceyA;Black,RyanA;Butler,StephenF;Inflexxion,Inc.
PainCAS是一种基于网络的临床工具，用于评估和跟踪慢性疼痛患者的疼痛和阿片类药物风险。尽管有证据表明其在临床环境中的效用，但PainCAS量表从未进行过心理测量评估。目前的研究是第一次评估PainCAS干扰与日常活动，心理/情绪困扰，和Painscales.MethodsPatients（N= 4797）从治疗中心和医院在16个不同的国家完成了PainCAS的心理测量特性作为常规临床评估的一部分。来自两家医院治疗中心的子样本（n= 73）也完成了比较指标。采用Rasch量表模型评估日常活动干扰和心理/情绪困扰量表，实证评估包括维度评估、区分度评估、项目拟合度评估、可靠性评估、信息评估和人对项目目标评估。此外，通过经典测试理论方法评估了收敛有效性和判别有效性。收敛效度的疼痛量表进行了评估，通过与相应的comparator items.ResultsOne干扰日常活动项目的相关性被删除，由于功能不良和歧视。保留项目的干扰与日常活动和心理/情绪困扰量表符合一维Rasch测量模型，产生令人满意的项目拟合，可靠性，精度和覆盖面。此外，研究结果提供了支持的收敛性和判别效度这两个尺度。PainCAS疼痛和BPI疼痛项目之间的收敛效度也很强。ConclusionTogether，结果为这些PainCAS疼痛量表提供了强有力的心理测量支持。目前的研究的优势和局限性进行了讨论。
PurposeThe PainCAS is a web-based clinical tool for assessing and tracking pain and opioid risk in chronic pain patients. Despite evidence for its utility within the clinical setting, the PainCAS scales have never been subject to psychometric evaluation. The current study is the first to evaluate the psychometric properties of the PainCAS Interference with Daily Activities, Psychological/Emotional Distress, and Pain scales.MethodsPatients (N= 4797) from treatment centers and hospitals in 16 different states completed the PainCAS as part of routine clinical assessment. A subsample (n= 73) from two hospital-based treatment centers also completed comparator measures. Rasch Rating Scale Models were employed to evaluate the Interference with Daily Activities and Psychological/Emotional Distress scales, and empirical evaluation included assessment of dimensionality, discrimination, item fit, reliability, information, and person-to-item targeting. Additionally, convergent and discriminant validity were evaluated through classical test theory approaches. Convergent validity of the Pain scales was evaluated through correlations with corresponding comparator items.ResultsOne Interference with Daily Activities item was removed due to poor functioning and discrimination. The retained items from the Interference with Daily Activities and Psychological/Emotional Distress scales conformed to unidimensional Rasch measurement models, yielding satisfactory item fit, reliability, precision, and coverage. Further, results provided support for the convergent and discriminant validity of these two scales. Convergent validity between the PainCAS Pain and BPI Pain items was also strong.ConclusionTaken together, results provide strong psychometric support for these PainCAS Pain scales. Strengths and limitations of the current study are discussed.